Category Archives: Ouch!

I was hoping that Congressman Trey Gowdy would be asked to weigh in on the NY Times’ now widely panned Benghazi report. The South Carolina spitfire was a guest on Fox’s On the Record with fill-in host, Dana Perino, and he did not disappoint.

Asked to comment on the report, Gowdy professed, “I want to congratulate the New York Times. It only took them 15 months to figure out how to spell Benghazi – so maybe in the next 15 months, their reporting will catch up with the truth.”

Continuing, he said, “I’ll tell you two things they got wrong. Number one – the video was translated into Arabic in early September of 2012….What in the world explains the violence in Benghazi prior to the video being translated and released? Our consulate was attacked way before the video was released. The British Ambassador was almost assassinated way before the video was released…the international Red Cross was attacked twice in Benghazi – well before this video was ever released. So if the video was really the impetus for the violence, what in the world explains the violence prior to the release of the video?

In respect to al Qaeda, he noted that “whether it was al Qaeda or a subsidiary, or a holding company, or a limited partnership – to quote Hillary Clinton – what difference does it make?! Who cares whether it was al Qaeda proper or a subsidiary? Four Americans are dead, and it wasn’t a spontaneous reaction to a video – it was planned.”

Gowdy also asked the question many House Republicans have been wondering in light of the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi prior to the attack, “why were we even there? Why was Chris Stevens in Benghazi, that night?”

He told Perino that he’s read the NY Times report six times. “I want you to read it six times and tell me if you can tell who the Secretary of State was when Benghazi happened. Because her name wasn’t mentioned a single. solitary. time. in this exhaustive NY Times piece – not once.”

When Perino noted that lots of people are assuming that the article was meant to “clear the decks” for Hillary so she won’t have to deal with Benghazi as a campaign issue, Gowdy reacted with mock consternation, “oh heavens no – that couldn’t possibly have been their motivation – could it be?!”

Bonus video:

On Monday night’s Special Report, Charles Krauthammer said the NY Times Benghazi report was undeniably about protecting Dems, and Hillary – “obviously a political move.”

After giving Obama 4 pinocchios for his repeated pledge to America that no one would take away” their health plans, Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post factchecker has “double tapped” the president with 3 more pinocchios for trying to scapegoat insurance companies.

The Pinocchio Test

Blaming the insurance companies can only go so far. First of all, the administration wrote the rules that set the conditions under which plans lose their grandfather status. But more important, the law has an effective date so far in the past that it virtually guaranteed that the vast majority of people currently in the individual market would end up with a notice saying they needed to buy insurance on the Obamacare exchanges.

The administration’s effort to pin the blame on insurance companies is a classic case of misdirection. Between 75 and 95 percent of the problem stems from the effective date, but the White House chooses to keep the focus elsewhere.

I’ve thought this (and said it) before, but it really does look like the media is finally turning on the SCOAMF.

I think the “direct” and “spicy” meeting with Senate Democrats might have included the threat, “Give us a delay or we’ll start voting with the Republicans on the If You Like Your Plan You Can Keep It bill,” which would of course destroy Obamacare (and the American insurance industry, too, at least until Obama permitted the repeal of his horrible law).

The Senate Majority Leader did himself proud, today, on the Senate floor where he suggested that Republican complaints about ObamaCare were not valid criticisms, but “jokes” that make he and his colleagues laugh.

In a speech on the Senate floor Thursday, the Nevada Democrat didn’t address any of the GOP’s specific complaints about the law. But he playfully suggested that Republicans, in order to save time, just “number their one through 50 criticisms of Obamacare” and yell out a number when they want to reference a specific complaint.

“We’ve heard things so many times, we would immediately laugh because basically they’re jokes,” Reid said.

I’m just wondering what part of people getting kicked off their plans and having to pay higher premiums under ObamaCare, is funny to him?

When asked whether he jumped or was pushed, HHS said simply that “Tony [Trenkle] made a decision that he was going to move to the private sector.” Memo to Darrell Issa: Subpoena this man.

CBS News has learned that [Tony] Trenkle, the Chief Information Officer for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), was originally supposed to sign off on security for the glitch-ridden website before its Oct. 1 launch, but didn’t. Instead, the authorization on September 27 was given by Trenkle’s boss, CMS administrator Marilyn Tavenner…

Trenkle and two other CMS officials, including Chief Operating Officer Michelle Snyder, signed an unusual “risk acknowledgement” saying that the agency’s mitigation plan for rigorous monitoring and ongoing tests did “not reduce the (security) risk to the … system itself going into operation on October 1, 2013.”…

Wednesday, an HHS spokesman said that the reason Tavenner, not Trenkle, signed the security authorization is because HealthCare.gov is “a high-profile project and CMS felt it warranted having the administrator sign the authority to operate memo.” HHS also says there is an aggressive risk mitigation plan in effect, “the privacy and security of consumers personal information is a top priority for us” and personal information is “protected by stringent security standards.”

Like this:

Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement – Obamacare, Welcome To The Land Of OZ:

This week, Judge Jeanine unloaded on the the president’s “signature legislation” – the epic clusterfark known as ObamaCare.

Pirro, a former prosecutor ObamaCare, expressed shock and dismay at the fact that the very navigators who are trusted to handle Social Security numbers, DOB, and personal identifiable information, don’t go through basic background or fingerprint checks.

“But it gets better”, she continued. “If those navigators have a prior conviction, it won’t disqualify them, anyway. An outstanding warrant? – no problem. In the midst of a bankruptcy? No problem……Has anyone in Washington every heard of identity theft?”

And she blasted the administration for the failure of the website launch. “They had three years to prepare and can’t even get the website off the ground,” she said. “‘Simple Sebelius’ doesn’t know how many people have signed up, but she knows it’s getting better.”

Noting that initially we were told that illegal immigrants wouldn’t be covered, she addressed the president directly: “You opened the National Mall for them to protest in the middle of a shutdown when our veterans couldn’t even access their memorial. And you give them transgender hormones while they’re in prison, and we spend two billion dollars on a program that provides hospital emergency care to illegals, and you really want us to believe that my kids are not going to paying for those ‘undocumented workers’ you want to give amnesty to, anyway?!”

Ann Coulter joined Pirro to talk about the disastrous ObamaCare launch. Asked if she thinks the individual mandate will be delayed, Coulter answered, “well, when they try to delay it I think that Republicans should say, “No, I’m sorry! We gave you that option!”

She gave three reasons why Republicans didn’t hurt themselves in the wake of the government shut down by taking a stand on ObamaCare.

1. there was no Fox News or internet in 1995.

2. This is about the hated ObamaCare the majority of Americans hate it, and never asked for it.

3. In 1995, Republicans had huge majorities in the House and the Senate. So America? You want us to end this plague? Just give Republicans a majority in the Senate.

Like this:

Organizing for Action, Obama’s (allegedly)nonpartisan and non-profit advocacy organization run by former advisors was set up to back the Regime on left-wing agenda items like gun control and immigration reform. In their latest totally non partisan effort, they’re targeting Republicans to push Obama’s gun control policies.

The pro-Obama group Organizing for Action said Monday it is launching online ads targeting 10 Republican senators and one Democrat for their opposition to expanded gun-control measures — the group’s second such campaign on the issue.

The ads, which will run on Facebook and on search engines, ask supporters to call the individual senators and express support for expanded gun-control measures.

Not surprisingly, the group, (being libs) didn’t have enough business sense to protect its presence online, so when a clever individual registered an OFA domain name ahead of them, instead of paying him for the site, OFA went bawling to the National Arbitration Forum – which promptly denied their effort to retrieve the domain name, organizingforaction.net back to them.

It was registered by “a quick-moving computer technician in Castle Rock, Colo., on Jan. 18, when the news broke that Obama’s former advisors were launching the group” the LA Timesreported:

Derek Bovard proceeded to configure the site so all the hits were directed to the website for the National Rifle Assn. It was one of three domain names for Organizing for Action that the group failed to register before it launched.

Instead, a lawyer with the firm Perkins Coie, representing Organizing for Action, filed a complaint with the National Arbitration Forum, which handles disputes over domain names.

***

In a decision issued last week, Karl V. Fink, a retired judge in Ann Arbor, Mich., concluded that Organizing for Action did not provide evidence that the name was “a distinctive identifier” of the group or that it owned any trademarks at the time.

(In fact, the group did not file a trademark registration for “Organizing for Action” until Feb. 7, according to United States Patent and Trademark Office records.)

The attorney representing OFA declined to comment, and so did a spokeswoman for Organizing for Action.

But those sites now include a disclaimer stating that they are “NOT affiliated with any 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), or other entity or business that uses the generic phrase Organizing For Action as all or a portion of its name.”

Like this:

I just heard Kirsten Powers say on Fox News’ Special Report that Obama likes to come back from behind…because he has some kind of psychological affinity for it, but I don’t believe for one second he’s enjoying the ridicule he’s having to endure today.

Here’s just one example – the latest in a deadly narrative an incumbent does not want to see metastasizing all over the place.

Deadly – but funnier than hell…

Via Ace of Spades HQ(who has been on fire all day – did he even go to bed, last night???)

And I’m pretty sure this has been done before – a compilation of all of Obama’s “uhs”…this time from the debate, via Weasel Zippers, compiled by BuzzFeed.

This next ad by AmericanFutureFund should get you in the mood for the next few debates – Paul Ryan’s, and Romney’s remaining two – because they’ll all be dealing with foreign policy which could (should!) be very problematic for Obama:

Karl Rove’s American Crossroads SuperPAC, which has bought up loads of TV time in Florida, airs virtually every conservative grievance with President Obama’s foreign policy in this new ad: Skipped intelligence briefings and playing 100 rounds of golf; campaign fundraisers after an ambassador is murdered in Libya; cold relations with Israel’s conservative leader amid nuclear-arms tensions with Iran; and “celebrity” ties to David Letterman, Beyonce and Jay-Z.

The researchers at the Republican National Committee notice this alarming fact in President Obama’s sequestration plan:

Obama’s Sequestration Plan Would Cut $1.084 Billion From The State Department’s Diplomatic And Consular Program, Including $2 Million For The Protection Of Foreign Missions And Officials, And $129 Million For Embassy Security, Construction, And Maintenance. (“OMB Report Pursuant To The Sequestration Transparency Act Of 2012,” Office Of Management And Budget, pp. 135-136, 9/14/12)

White House Spokesman Jay Carney told reporters today that the Middle East protests were in response to a video.

“These protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region… The unrest we’ve seen in the region has been in reaction to a video.”

The Muslim protests were planned back in August – before the film was ever released.
The protest in Cairo was organized by the terror group, Jamaa Islamiya.USA Today reported:

The protest was planned by Salafists well before news circulated of an objectionable video ridiculing Islam’s prophet, Mohammed, said Eric Trager, an expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

The protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo was announced Aug. 30 by Jamaa Islamiya, a State Department-designated terrorist group, to protest the ongoing imprisonment of its spiritual leader, Sheikh Omar abdel Rahman. He is serving a life sentence in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

So Carney’s still telling reporters that they’ve seen no information to suggest that it was a pre-planned attack….?

I’m just a little old nobody from flyover country who’s been traveling for two days straight, yet I’ve been able to gather that it was indeed, a pre-planned attack, for Pete’s sake….

Why does the administration feel the need to pretend otherwise? Could it be because they know that these embassies in unstable Middle Eastern countries were left insecure and vulnerable on 9/11, and they don’t want to get blamed for the ensuing carnage? So they’re using the Muslim extremists’ own propaganda as a fig leaf?